The Artist is digging deep into Prince’s past

NEW YORK - Even for a notorious control freak, the Artist Formerly Known as Prince is planning a pretty audacious challenge to his old record company.

Unhappy at his failure to gain possession of the music he recorded for Warner Bros., the Artist said he will re-record the music and sell it on his own.

That’s everything. "Purple Rain," "Little Red Corvette," "Raspberry Beret," "Kiss," the whole catalog. He recorded 17 albums for Warners beginning in 1978 when he was seen as a teen-age prodigy until their nasty divorce five years ago, not including a greatest hits package.

Re-creating the music shouldn’t be much of a problem. That’s because on most of the records he played all the instruments himself and provided all the vocals, the Artist said.

"Fleetwood Mac would be hard-pressed to do something like this," he said. "The only people I would have to argue with are the people in my head."

He’s not discouraging anyone from buying his old records; he still gets paid when that happens. But he gets paid a lot more if he sells them himself, and he wants to own recordings of the music which made his name -- before he changed it, of course.

He has repeatedly made known his interest in obtaining the rights to his own master recordings, said Bob Merlis, a spokesman for Warner Bros. Records. That doesn’t mean there have been any negotiations toward that end.

"We’ll always talk to somebody," Merlis said. "It’s extremely unlikely that we will ever give an artist, with no compensation, original works that were sold to us under a valid contract."

Re-recording material isn’t unprecedented; Chuck Berry and Jerry Lee Lewis did it when they switched record companies in the early days of rock ‘N’ roll, Merlis said. But it’s unusual today, and most contracts with artists prohibit such re-recording for a set period of time. He wouldn’t comment on The Artist’s contract.

"I would be interested to hear what it sounded like," Merlis said.

Just before last New Year’s Eve, Warner Bros. distributed to radio stations a single version of Prince’s song, "1999," that was originally released in 1982, sparking some renewed sales. The Artist responded by re-recording the song in several different versions and selling the CD via his Web site.

But that was just one song -- not hundreds.

The Artist insists that much of his early material will sound better when redone since recording technology has improved. He won’t say whether he will be faithful to the old versions or if he will tweak them. He gave no timetable for their release.

"Most artists lose their voice, their hair and their bands," the 40-year-old singer said. "That’s not going to happen to me."

The workaholic songwriter said he’s composing an opera, presumably in his spare time. He’s also making another studio album, and in another departure from his work habits, he is allowing other producers to work on his music, and is writing songs with others.

He won’t identify the collaborators, other than to say, "I’m working with some people you wouldn’t expect me to be working with." They might even remain unidentified on the final release due to contractual issues.

And how will the strong-willed Artist deal with it when a collaborator disagrees with him on how something sounds?

"They know it’s my album," he said. "They’re going to give me the last word."

Since leaving Warner Bros., the Artist briefly had a distribution deal with EMI. Most recently, he’s been selling his music primarily through orders placed to his Web site, including last year’s box set, "Crystal Ball."

But he said he’s likely to work out a deal with a major label to release his next album. He said he has no problem working with a big label. "What I had a problem with is ownership of the work when I was finished."

Re-recording would be the latest salvo in his decade-long feud with Warners. It was that feud that led to him scrawling "slave" on his face during some performances, and to legally changing his name to the Artist Formerly Known as Prince. While he has his own typically eccentric spin, he’s also a model for the growing trend of musicians taking control of their business affairs.

His "freedom" mantra is actually consistent with the unusual announcement that he had renewed his vows with his wife, Mayte, in February. He said they wanted to "transcend" their marriage without the encumbrance of a legal contract. But he stressed that he and his wife, a former dancer whom he married in 1996, did not get a divorce.

His album sales have steadily tumbled since "Purple Rain" sold 12 million. That’s not unexpected, since few musicians stay on top for so long. But his decision to stand apart from the traditional record business machinery also probably ensures that his hit-making days are over.

He said he’s much happier now.

"It’s more fun for me because you can actually see the difference in the music," he said. "You can feel the freedom in the air when you’re like that and you’re not thinking about anything like what is the next single or how can I make my image look good for the video.

"All that stuff is in your head whether you’re thinking about it or not."It’s the Artist vs. the World Wide Web

The Artist has gone on a legal offensive against Web sites devoted to him. At least one site has responded by going after his symbol.

The copyright and trademark infringement lawsuits, filed in February against nine Web sites, accuse them of selling bootlegged recordings by the former Prince and offering access to downloads of his songs.

Through the format known as MP3, the selling and trading of music downloaded through computers has become wildly popular. It has made the music industry, and some artists, nervous because of a perceived threat to the CD and tape market.

"The Artist clearly wants to stop unauthorized distribution of his music," said Michael Elkin, his attorney. "The material that he puts out is the material that he selects. People should not be permitted to release product without his consent."

In trying to stop the Web sites' activities, the Artist has also alleged unauthorized use of photographs, sales of books and a CD-ROM. He also said people have been infringing upon his trademark of the odd symbol that he has used as his name since 1993.

One defendant, Uptown Productions, filed a countersuit last week that claimed the Artist had no right to trademark his symbol. The former Prince can’t claim unauthorized use because he frequently encouraged people to use it as a substitute for his name, said the company, which operates a Web site and distributes a fan magazine.

Uptown also claims the symbol is in the public domain since it’s a copy of an ancient symbol for soapstone.

Paul Rapp, the lawyer who represents Uptown, said he believed the Artist was going on the attack to chill competition because he wanted to put out a fan magazine of his own.

"We really just want to be left alone," he said.

• Bluefield Daily Telegraph (Bluefield, WV) 13 April 1999
• Carlsbad Current-Argus (Carlsbad, NM), 13 April 1999
• The Napa Valley Register (Napa, CA) 14 April 1999
• Fort Worth Star-Telegram (Fort Worth, TX), 15 April 1999
• Reno Gazette-Journal (Reno, NV) 15 April 1999
• The Anniston Star (Anniston, AL), 15 April 1999
• The Baltimore Sun (Baltimore, MD), 15 April 1999
• The Burlington Free Press (Burlington, VT), 15 April 1999
• The Courier (Waterloo, IA), 15 April 1999
• The Kokomo Tribune (Kokomo, IN), 15 April 1999
• The Town Talk (Alexandria, LA), 15 April 1999
• Intelligencer Journal (Lancaster, PA), 16 April 1999
• Johnson City Press (Johnson City, TN), 16 April 1999
• Minneapolis Star Tribune (Minneapolis, MN) 16 April 1999
• Northwest Herald (Woodstock, IL), 16 April 1999
• Petoskey News-Review (Petoskey, MI), 16 April 1999
• Tallahassee Democrat (Tallahassee, FL), 16 April 1999
• The Californian (Salinas, CA), 16 April 1999
• The Danville News (Danville, PA), 16 April 1999
• The Evening Sun (Hanover, PA), 16 April 1999
• The Galveston Daily News (Galveston, TX), 16 April 1999
• The Kansas City Star (Kansas City, MO), 16 April 1999
• The News-Messenger (Fremont, OH), 16 April 1999
• Calgary Herald (Calgary, AB, Canada), 17 April 1999
• The Gazette (Montreal, QC, Canada), 17 April 1999
• The Herald-Palladium (Saint Joseph, MI), 17 April 1999
• The Jackson Sun (Jackson, TN), 17 April 1999
• The Leader-Post (Regina, SK, Canada) 17 April 1999
• The Ottawa Citizen (Ottawa, ON, Canada) 17 April 1999
• Standard-Speaker (Hazleton, PA), 18 April 1999
• Star-Gazette (Elmira, NY), 18 April 1999
• The Cincinnati Enquirer (Cincinatti, OH), 18 April 1999
• The Daily Advertiser (Lafayette, LA), 18 April 1999
• The Indianapolis Star (Indianapolis, IN), 18 April 1999
• The Leaf-Chronicle (Clarksville, TN), 18 April 1999
• The Post-Crescent (Appleton, WI), 18 April 1999
• The Province (Vancouver, BC, Canada), 18 April 1999
• The Sentinel (Carlisle, PA), 18 April 1999
• The Times Herald (Port Huron, MI), 18 April 1999
• The Tribune (Coshocton, OH), 18 April 1999
• Star-Phoenix (Saskatoon, SK, Canada), 19 April 1999
• The Bismarck Tribune (Bismarck, ND), 19 April 1999
• The Vancouver Sun (Vancouver, BC, Canada), 19 April 1999
• Times Colonist (Victoria, BC, Canada), 19 April 1999
• Daily Record (Morristown, NJ), 20 April 1999
• The Herald (Jasper, IN), 20 April 1999
• The Palm Beach Post (West Palm Beach, FL), 21 April 1999
• The Republic (Columbus, IN), 21 April 1999
• The Oshkosh Northwestern (Oshkosh, WI), 22 April 1999
• Rapid City Journal (Rapid City, SD), 23 April 1999
• The Desert Sun (Palm Springs, CA), 23 April 1999
• The Odessa American (Odessa, TX), 23 April 1999
• The Tennessean (Nashville, TN 24 April ’99
• Florida Today (Cocoa, FL), 25 April 1999
• Palladium-Item (Richmond, IN), 27 April 1999
• Statesman Journal (Salem, OR), 28 April 1999
• The Guardian (UK), 3 May 1999
• The Pantagraph (Bloomington, IL), 3 May 1999
• The Sydney Morning (Sydney, NSW, Australia), 6 May 1999
• The Times and Democrat (Orangeburg, SC), 25 May 1999